2Tim 3:16 “All scripture is God-breathed…”

2Peter 1:20 “Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.”

I don’t think God would inspire a book that is hard to understand for those that are truly seeking him. This scripture is pretty straight forward. I’m no biblical scholar and the carpenters, fisherman, and tax collectors of the day were not either. These and the religious of their day, took it for what is says. If you have trouble understanding – ask GOD to open your eyes and give you wisdom and understanding. If you want to be in good graces with God, you ought to quit trying to stretch a meaning out of or into it. Just do what it says and your life will go just fine. You’ll be happy and at peace. It works!!!

What you said is the truth.Paul was expressing an opinion and there is no need to treat it as “THUS SAITH THE LORD” Deborah 4 & 5 does it for me. Absolutely perfect as an example of the esteem God holds on women.

Judges 4:4-5 Deborah the prophetees, the wife of Lappidoth, was LEADING ISRAEL at that time.

She HELD COURT under the palm of Deborah between Ramah and Bethel in the hill country of Ephraim, AND THE ISRAELITES CAME TO HER TO HAVE THEIR DISPUTES DECIDED.

For the rest– if you’re going to take 1 Tim 2:12 as timeless and for all time, regardless of whether or not women nowadays have received education in the faith– then please take the other verses as timeless too. All you men, start lifting your hands when you pray in church. Not to do so is to ignore the plain text. And women– no more wearing of jewelry or expensive clothing to church. Better start taking Paul’s words for exactly what they say, and nothing else.

And another thing– Paul’s words in other letters directly command us to kiss each other in church. I can’t think why we keep ignoring the plain text of that one, too. Pucker up, folks!

We even play around with v14 and assume Paul is refering to “Eve” when in fact he says “the woman” AND uses the present tense. The woman who he stopped from teaching, Paul is saying is deceived and in transgression, at the time he wrote the letter to Timothy. Anything more is speculation.

Paul stopped a deceived woman from teaching a man in the very context of false teaching.

And it seems ever so clear to me that Paul says “a woman” as in “any woman”. This makes Kathy’s reasoning just as unconvincing.

I am concerned with hearing the usage of ‘women’ when speaking of this passage though ‘women’ plural is not in the text.

How does one determine whether or not ‘a woman’ is generic for all women or used for a particular woman? By looking to the context.

1. Looking at vv.8,9&10 we have generic plural, men and women.
2. Then look at v.11. It says ‘a woman’. Is it generic for all women or used for a particular single woman? Well one cannot say that it is plural thus far in the text BECAUSE so far, up to v.11, PAUL made a change from plural in vv.8-10 to singular, v.11. So the question stands the moment Paul makes the shift from plural to singular.
3. Ask yourself, is there anywhere in the passage then or next that tells which Paul had in mind? Paul’s mention of Eve doesn’t tell us anything. Paul’s mention of Adam doesn’t tell us. (Unless one assumes or believes Adam had some gender status, based on his being created first, above Eve because remember, in this text thus far at this point it cannot be established whether or not Paul’s uasge was meant genereic or particular.)
4. You can only find the answer once you read v.15. There is a single reference and a plural reference that is, a ’she’ and ‘they’. Who’s she? Who’s they? ‘She’ and ‘they’ cannot refer back to the same thing, that is, ‘a woman’ as that would not be grammaticaly correct. NOTE:If one begins with the idea that she refers back to ‘a woman’ having already in mind that ‘a woman’ is used generic for all women, then one has started backwards when in fact it is the ’she’ and ‘they’ reference that cannot refer to the same thing which determines Paul’s meaning and besides, one would still have to answer for ‘they’.

‘She’ will be saved if ‘they’ (a woman and a man, probably a married couple) continue in faith and love, the very things some were straying from as said in 1 Tim 1:5. So what we have is Paul stopping 1 woman from teaching 1 man.

Is it possible that Paul was used ‘a woman’ to mean generic for all women? NO. Not contextualy, grammaticaly.

I beleive that in the proper context and done in the right way a gifted woman may teach a mixed adult audience, for example in an adult Sunday School class. So long as it is clear that the teaching is under the authority of the male leadership and so long as the audience does not perceive the woman to be teaching with ultimate authority. This might not work in every context but it ought not be ruled out just by I Tim. 2:12.

Would you agree with this?